We performed a comparison between Atoll Technologies System Architecture Management Utility and Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about LeanIX, Sparx Systems, erwin by Quest and others in Enterprise Architecture Management."The solution is stable. We haven't had any serious technical issues."
More Atoll Technologies System Architecture Management Utility Pros →
"We use it to develop and maintain the Enterprise Conceptual Model, migrated from erwin a couple of years ago."
"Ability to maintain cross-references for all models in all levels - great tractability."
"Modeling is a part of my work, and it has a lot of standard modeling languages. It is quite wide, and a lot is possible in it. We are not programming it ourselves, but if you are into programming and developing software yourself, you can go further and do a lot with Sparx. You can work from the framework and go into the details. With this solution, you get a lot of value at a low cost. It is also quite intuitive in terms of use. I like the use of it."
"Ability to keep inventory of reusable blocks, and use in different diagrams with views of various templates."
"A feature I like most about Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is its ease of use."
"Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is very flexible and it is simple to define the metamodel. Additionally, it is lightweight on resources."
"The initial setup is easy."
"It's a stable and scalable solution. I like that it's similar to Rational Rose."
"The user interface needs improvement. The solution needs to add a few features to improve the overall user experience. Security needs to be strengthened as well."
More Atoll Technologies System Architecture Management Utility Cons →
"The automatic creation of reports based on the model elements could be improved."
"More challenging than other tools to maintain documents and document versions for an architecture board review."
"The database management area was not usable."
"It took me a while to figure out how to use the report generation features effectively. So, it would be really nice if they had a way to make that a little bit more interactive and a little bit more straightforward."
"When the model is large, it is a bit slow to render."
"Sparx can be a bit slow. If you are trying to design software architecture, sometimes we run into issues and need to refresh."
"No way to implement data integrity and referential integrity constraints."
"The initial setup of the Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect It's very complicated. It's very difficult to start with the right templates because there are many possibilities. The deployment took approximately two days."
More Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Atoll Technologies System Architecture Management Utility is ranked 31st in Enterprise Architecture Management while Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is ranked 2nd in Enterprise Architecture Management with 97 reviews. Atoll Technologies System Architecture Management Utility is rated 8.0, while Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Atoll Technologies System Architecture Management Utility writes "A stable scalable solution with mid-range price points". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect writes "Easy to set up and had no issues with stability, but it's not a very friendly tool, and its database modeling and entity-relationship modeling functions need improvement". Atoll Technologies System Architecture Management Utility is most compared with , whereas Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is most compared with Visual Paradigm, Visio, No Magic MagicDraw, Lucidchart and LeanIX.
See our list of best Enterprise Architecture Management vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Architecture Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.